Which country is the most nationalistic?

[Traitorfish]

I can try to explain.
Look at the map of Europe. There is a region which consists of relatively small states, populated with people of different cultures, ethnicities and language groups - the region which people usually call Europe. The division of it to three geographical parts is natural and has been commonly accepted. France - Western, Germany - Central and Poland - Eastern parts. Farther to the East, only huge and wild Russian bear-land. Yes, last 20 years there are also Ukraine and Belorussia, but they anyway are Russian sphe.. erm, I mean they exist not long ago and there are no reasons to reconsider geographical division of Europe because of them.

This appears to reflect a particularly Russian attitude, which I suppose may be part of the confusion; in the rest of Europe, as has been mentioned, we consider Europe to extend to the borders of European Russian, typically defined as the Ural Mountains, rather than petering out at some point around Minsk. If you wish to exclude what we Westerners consider to be "Eastern Europe", which is to say Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldavia, from the greater entity known as "Europe", then you're essentially left with Central Europe representing the Eastern part of Europe. Any further divisions essentially represent divisions within this sphere, much as "North-Western Europe" refers to that portion of Western Europe inhabited by Germanic and Insular Celtic peoples, which is to say the British Isles.

If the term doesn't make sense, there is no reason to use it. The point is to avoid confusion - Poland has always been considered as Eastern Europe, Central is countries like Germany and Switzerland. I don't see why we should reconsider such division because of some strange Polish complexes when they take offense because of geographical terms.

I don't believe this is the case; the identification with non-Germanic, non-Romance Europe as "Eastern" seems to date only from the Cold War, because those countries happened to be included in the Soviet Bloc. Prior to that, the majority of these countries were part of either the Prussian/German or Austrian Empires, which together essentially defined "Central Europe" in the 19th/early 20th century. Before that, the main divide in Europe was between Catholic and Orthodox Europe (the Catholic/Protestant divide never having quite as far-reaching cultural impact, as previously discussed), in which Catholic Slavs such as the Poles and Czechs aligned themselves with Catholic Western Europe, particularly the Central European cultural sphere represented by High Germany.

 

[red_elk]

This appears to reflect a particularly Russian attitude, which I suppose may be part of the confusion; in the rest of Europe, as has been mentioned, we consider Europe to extend to the borders of European Russian, typically defined as the Ural Mountains, rather than petering out at some point around Minsk.

It's not just "you" consider, geographically European border is at the Ural mountains. But the Eastern of all European countries has always been Poland, just recently Ukraine and Belorussia appeared. You really don't see that non-Russian Europe is quite separate political conglomerate? "Eastern Europe" today can be rephrased as "Eastern EU".

If you wish to exclude what we Westerners consider to be "Eastern Europe", which is to say Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldavia, from the greater entity known as "Europe", then you're essentially left with Central Europe representing the Eastern part of Europe. Any further divisions essentially represent divisions within this sphere, much as "North-Western Europe" refers to that portion of Western Europe inhabited by Germanic and Insular Celtic peoples, which is to say the British Isles.

I wouldn't speak for all Westerners if I were you. Quite obviously many of them consider Poland as Eastern Europe, following UN definition.

I don't believe this is the case; the identification with non-Germanic, non-Romance Europe as "Eastern" seems to date only from the Cold War, because those countries happened to be included in the Soviet Bloc. Prior to that, the majority of these countries were part of either the Prussian/German or Austrian Empires, which together essentially defined "Central Europe" in the 19th/early 20th century. Before that, the main divide in Europe was between Catholic and Orthodox Europe (the Catholic/Protestant divide never having quite as far-reaching cultural impact, as previously discussed), in which Catholic Slavs such as the Poles and Czechs aligned themselves with Catholic Western Europe, particularly the Central European cultural sphere represented by High Germany.

This is a fallacy that term "Eastern Europe" originated from Cold War - you confuse it with "Eastern block", which included also countries from South-Eastern and Central Europe, such as GDR. I can understand Polish objections to be called part of Eastern block or Russian sphere of influence, but taking offence from geographical term is ridiculous.

And Orthodox-Catholic division certainly existed, but again it has little to do with division between Central and Eastern Europe as since Orthodox Christianity was originated from Byzantium and widely distributed also in Southern Europe, whereas Ukraine always had strong Catholic influence and can only arguably be considered as Orthodox country.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Moldavia

Moldova. Moldavia is the ancient Carpathian region in which Moldova and Transnistria are located.

 

[warpus]

There is no such thing as north Asian country (except some sites refer to Mongolia as such), but if there is Eastern European country in the world, the best candidate would be Poland.

Nice rebuttal You didn't address my point and simply regurgitated yours

 

[TheLastOne36]

This is a fallacy that term "Eastern Europe" originated from Cold War - you confuse it with "Eastern block", which included also countries from South-Eastern and Central Europe, such as GDR. I can understand Polish objections to be called part of Eastern block or Russian sphere of influence, but taking offence from geographical term is ridiculous.

And Orthodox-Catholic division certainly existed, but again it has little to do with division between Central and Eastern Europe as since Orthodox Christianity was originated from Byzantium and widely distributed also in Southern Europe, whereas Ukraine always had strong Catholic influence and can only arguably be considered as Orthodox country.

WHAT GEOGRAPHIC TERM?

it isn't Geographic. There is no Eastern Europe Geographically. There is no mountains splitting Germany from Poland or anything.

Eastern European is a cultural term. Poland is not culturally Eastern European. If Poland is Eastern European culturally, than Krakow would have domed cathedrals, not German/central European like castle things.

Ukraine had strong Catholic influence due to being a part of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth.

 

[Weik]

Why does my history book from 1926 describe Poland as eastern?

 

[red_elk]

Nice rebuttal You didn't address my point and simply regurgitated yours

Because I already explained my reasonings. "Eastern Europe" is long and well established term, "Eastern block" - obsolete one and "North Asia" - pretty much not being used in politics. If it was, Mongolia (not China) can be called North Asian country for sure.

Eastern European is a cultural term. Poland is not culturally Eastern European. If Poland is Eastern European culturally, than Krakow would have domed cathedrals, not German/central European like castle things.

Why domed cathedrals is a good division between Central and Eastern Europe, but Slavic and Germanic languages is not good? Because you like it more? It's not enough.

Ukraine had strong Catholic influence due to being a part of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth.

Yes, Eastern Europe is a mixture of different cultures and religions. Ukrainian regions were part of Poland, Polish were part of Russia and so on.

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Wait a minute - are you aware that this discussion is completely pointless? Some people will argue that Poland is in eastern Europe because they want to see it there, and some will argue that it is not. Those who wants it to be in the eastern Europe just don't change their minds because of someone else's arguments - they simply want Poland to be in eastern Europe and the thought that it should be considered "central european country" makes them vomit or worse. It's a common mistake - you won't persuade a man who doesn't want to be persuaded in the first place. It's like trying to explain an American, that in fact USA is not #1 or that American cars, while look good, are in reality a crap. Totally pointless.

So... why not just accept that fact, and live on?

 

[red_elk]

Wait a minute - are you aware that this discussion is completely pointless? Some people will argue that Poland is in eastern Europe because they want to see it there, and some will argue that it is not. Those who wants it to be in the eastern Europe just don't change their minds because of someone else's arguments - they simply want Poland to be in eastern Europe and the thought that it should be considered "central european country" makes them vomit or worse. It's a common mistake - you won't persuade a man who doesn't want to be persuaded in the first place. It's like trying to explain an American, that in fact USA is not #1 or that American cars, while look good, are in reality a crap. Totally pointless.

So... why not just accept that fact, and live on?

What if we switch "Central" and "Eastern" words in your message?

 

[Aquila SPQR]

This post was meant to present both points of view and to show they are both pointless - you can switch them if you want.

But - isn't it true?

 

[warpus]

Of course it's pointless, but it's fun, isn't it?

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Hmm... well... I am fighting with 9/11 conspiracy theories since 2006 so I know what a participating in a pointless discussion is... and yes, it's sometimes fun. But most of the time, it's a complete waste

 

[red_elk]

Of course it's fun - to collect group of Poles, arguing against calling their country Eastern European, against their cavalry charging German tanks or something similar. Especially in the thread about nationalism

 

[Aquila SPQR]

Of course it's fun - to collect group of Poles, arguing against calling their country Eastern European, against their cavalry charging German tanks or something similar.

Now I see you finally accepted the truth. As we all know myth about Polish cavalry charging German tanks is stupid. And, as you said, calling Poland "Eastern European" is similar - it's stupid too

Besides, I see no connection between nationalism and this eastern/central european debate. I fail to see how expressing view that a country should be considered eastern, central or western european is nationalistic. In my opinion "USA#1", "Our cars are the best in the world, just because they are manufactered by us!", "We are the Master race!", "We are the best nation because we built the longest bridge in the world!" or something like that are examples of naive nationalism.

That's just a difference in perception. But it is curious that people who have no strong feelings about Poland (good or bad) tend to have no opinion about this case (they simply don't care), and those who strongly object calling Poland a "central european" tend to share anti-polish sentiment

So, basically we may conclude, that those who object calling Poland "central europan" often base their opinion on their hatred toward that country. It's not a good reason/argument in political/geographical discussion.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Why domed cathedrals is a good division between Central and Eastern Europe, but Slavic and Germanic languages is not good? Because you like it more? It's not enough.

Because Languages don't define culture?

Also, how about the Western Slavic languages and Eastern Slavic languages divide?

Of course it's fun - to collect group of Poles, arguing against calling their country Eastern European, against their cavalry charging German tanks or something similar. Especially in the thread about nationalism

I can vouch for this,

My great-grandfathe was the captain/general of a Calvary unit in WWII. They did not charge tanks. They did all sorts of things though, from raiding German posts and camps setting them on fire, getting close enough to tanks and weapon shacks and stuff to get off the horse and fire a bazooka at them, etc.

No Tank Charging.

So, basically we may conclude, that those who object calling Poland "central europan" often base their opinion on their hatred toward that country. It's not a good reason/argument in political/geographical discussion.

Or are just trolls.

 

[red_elk]

Now I see you finally accepted the truth. As we all know myth about Polish cavalry charging German tanks is stupid. And, as you said, calling Poland "Eastern European" is similar - it's stupid too

Strange logic. I didn't say or imply that any one of these things is stupidity. Though whole argument was a bit mockery from my side (hope noone got offended), the UN classification of Poland as "Eastern Europe" is not stupid by any means and my arguments were not joke.

As for "Polish cavalry charge", I don't know much about that, except that thing probably originated from Guderian's memoirs. The fact itself doesn't sound to me impossible or stupid - history knows even more stupid military actions or misplaced orders, like British light cavalry charge. Feel free to correct me if you want though.

 

[red_elk]

Because Languages don't define culture?

Also, how about the Western Slavic languages and Eastern Slavic languages divide?

Don't know exactly what you mean - language is important part of culture.

My great-grandfathe was the captain/general of a Calvary unit in WWII. They did not charge tanks. They did all sorts of things though, from raiding German posts and camps setting them on fire, getting close enough to tanks and weapon shacks and stuff to get off the horse and fire a bazooka at them, etc.
No Tank Charging.

But... may be it was not your great-grandfather's unit? Some neighboring unit did that and they did not tell anybody because felt ashamed?

 

[Leoreth]

Cavalry vs. Tank charges are pure Nazi propaganda. It's as false as Poland being Eastern Europe.

Both are still fun to drop in a discussion to see if there are over-patriotic Poles around, though

 

[TheLastOne36]

Don't know exactly what you mean - language is important part of culture.

No it isn't. It's an important part of a nations identity or culture, but when speaking in broader terms, it ain't important at all. The Catalonians for example, while hating on the Spanish nonstop, and hate being mentioned in the same sentence as them, are not going to deny they are Southern/Western/Southwestern European.

But... may be it was not your great-grandfather's unit? Some neighboring unit did that and they did not tell anybody because felt ashamed?

My great-grandfather was in more power than just of a unit, he was one of the bigger names in the Polish Armies calvary division. (He was one of the commanders in Pilsudki's army, and thus had some kind of reputation in the military) He knew what went on with the calvary units, and there was no tank charging.

 

[Squonk]

please, lets stop this polish-ukrainian-russian talk.

Turks are probably the most nationalistic / patriotic nation I know. Russians seem quite nationalistic too, but they do have more reasons for that than the others around. Lithuanians, or Ukrainians from western Ukraine are quite nationalistic. When it comes to Poles, it really depends on the region, age, etc. Every nation has its own kind of nationalism, and its own extremists.